A REAL Homeland Security Test

About the Author

James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.Vice President for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, and the E. W. Richardson Fellow

Congressional commissions come and go. Few make history. The
9/11 Commission was a remarkable exception. Its report became a
bestseller. Its recommendations became "the" top priorities for the
new, Democratic-led Congress.

In 2007, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared it was essential
for the House to "keep the promise to the 9/11 families and honor
the work of the 9/11 Commission."

But Congress did not have to address one key recommendation ...
because it was already on the books. Passed in 2005 with bipartisan
support, the REAL ID Act sets national security standards for
driver's licenses.

One provision requires states to assure that any identity cards
used for a federal purpose (like passing through a Transportation
Security Administration security checkpoint before boarding a
plane) be issued only to individuals who are lawfully present in
the United States. The law also prompts states to adopt best
practices to provide better information protection and combat
identity theft, fraud, and trafficking in counterfeit IDs.

Now, however, a draft bill known as the PASS ID Act is floating
around Congress. If passed, it would roll back all these security
improvements.

REAL ID has been under constant assault since its inception. The
criticisms have always been off-base.

There were claims it requires a "national identity" card. It
does not. No new identity credentials are established.

There were complaints it was "mandatory." It is not. States can
opt out. Indeed, several have said they don't want to
participate.

It was portrayed as a threat to civil liberties. In fact, REAL
ID standards for protecting individual privacy are more rigorous
than previous standards in many states. Moreover, they do not
require states to provide any additional information to
Washington.

Finally, critics labeled REAL ID an "unfunded mandate." Wrong!
The federal government twice postponed implementation to ease
pressure on the states, then negotiated a phase-in of requirements.
Additionally, it has provided grants to help states implement the
program. No cram-down here!

With all these issues asked and answered there is no need for
Congress to wade in with new legislation. Still, it may do so
anyway at the behest of states that declined to participate in the
program. These states have a key ally, Homeland Security Secretary
Janet Napolitano. As governor of Arizona, she vociferously opposed
REAL ID.

Congressional committee staffs are still hammering out the final
language for the PASS ID bill, but so far the draft looks pretty
daft. It would repeal standards for secure drivers' licenses, but
not repeal the financial aid to help states meet those standards.
Instead, it would divert the money to a new slush fund that any
state could tap for almost anything related to driver
licensure.

It could have been worse. The original draft called for outright
repeal of the REAL ID act. That would have killed all of its
security provisions--not just those pertaining to identification
documents.

For example, REAL ID authorizes environmental waivers to build
barriers and other infrastructure along the border to prevent
illegal border crossing. It also allows the government to deport
individuals for providing material support to terrorists. Full
repeal would have eliminated that authority.

While the final draft avoids those pernicious effects, it still
reads as an initiative designed to pave the way for granting a
general amnesty to illegal immigrants. One reading of the PASS ID
Act suggests it may establish a federal requirement, as part of
"legalization," that states must issue drivers' licenses to
everyone here illegally.

It cannot be a coincidence that the strongest advocates for
amnesty are also among the harshest congressional critics of REAL
ID. For years, they have been "finding" all kinds of concerns,
problems, challenges, costs they didn't happen to notice when
Congress first passed the law. Now, they say, we must pass a new
law to "fix" these imaginary shortcomings.

Before doing anything else with the PASS ID Act, Congress needs
to take a hard look at what is in it. They must be careful not to
violate Speaker Pelosi's dictum that Congress "keep the promise to
the 9/11 families and honor the work of the 9/11 Commission."

James Jay Carafano is Senior Research Fellow in
national security policy at The Heritage Foundation.

About the Author

James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.Vice President for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, and the E. W. Richardson Fellow